Premium
SU‐E‐T‐50: Automatic Validation of Megavoltage Beams Modeled for Clinical Use in Radiation Therapy
Author(s) -
Melchior M,
Aranda F Salinas,
Sciutto S,
Dodat D,
Larragueta N
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4888380
Subject(s) - dicom , imaging phantom , nuclear medicine , radiation treatment planning , dosimetry , beam (structure) , percentage depth dose curve , software , ionization chamber , computer science , radiation therapy , medical physics , mathematics , physics , optics , medicine , artificial intelligence , radiology , ion , programming language , quantum mechanics , ionization
Purpose: To automatically validate megavoltage beams modeled in XiO™ 4.50 (Elekta, Stockholm, Sweden) and Varian Eclipse™ Treatment Planning Systems (TPS) (Varian Associates, Palo Alto, CA, USA), reducing validation time before beam‐on for clinical use. Methods: A software application that can automatically read and analyze DICOM RT Dose and W2CAD files was developed using MatLab integrated development environment. TPS calculated dose distributions, in DICOM RT Dose format, and dose values measured in different Varian Clinac beams, in W2CAD format, were compared. Experimental beam data used were those acquired for beam commissioning, collected on a water phantom with a 2D automatic beam scanning system. Two methods were chosen to evaluate dose distributions fitting: gamma analysis and point tests described in Appendix E of IAEA TECDOC‐1583. Depth dose curves and beam profiles were evaluated for both open and wedged beams. Tolerance parameters chosen for gamma analysis are 3% and 3 mm dose and distance, respectively.Absolute dose was measured independently at points proposed in Appendix E of TECDOC‐1583 to validate software results. Results: TPS calculated depth dose distributions agree with measured beam data under fixed precision values at all depths analyzed. Measured beam dose profiles match TPS calculated doses with high accuracy in both open and wedged beams. Depth and profile dose distributions fitting analysis show gamma values < 1. Relative errors at points proposed in Appendix E of TECDOC‐1583 meet therein recommended tolerances.Independent absolute dose measurements at points proposed in Appendix E of TECDOC‐1583 confirm software results. Conclusion: Automatic validation of megavoltage beams modeled for their use in the clinic was accomplished. The software tool developed proved efficient, giving users a convenient and reliable environment to decide whether to accept or not a beam model for clinical use. Validation time before beam‐on for clinical use was reduced to a few hours.